On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:55:08PM -0600, Frank Rowand wrote:

On 1/20/21 11:43 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:

quoted

Hi Frank,

On 20-01-21, 23:34, Frank Rowand wrote:

quoted

It should be possible to apply this same concept to copying overlay_base.dts
to overlay_base_base.dts, removing the "/plugin/;" from overlay_base_base.dts
and using an additional rule to use fdtoverlay to apply overlay.dtb on top
of overlay_base_base.dtb.

Are you suggesting to then merge this with testcases.dtb to get
static_test.dtb

no

quoted

or keep two output files (static_test.dtb from
testcases.dtb + overlays and static_test2.dtb from overlay_base.dtb
and overlay.dtb) ?

yes, but using the modified versions ("/plugin/;" removed) of
testcases.dtb and overlay_base.dtb.

I really don't understand why you want /plugin/ in *any* version of
testcases.dtb.

quoted

Asking because as I mentioned earlier, overlay_base.dtb doesn't have
__overlay__ property for its nodes and we can't apply that to
testcases.dtb using fdtoverlay.

Correct.

I apologize in advance if I get confused in these threads or cause confusion.
I find myself going in circles and losing track of how things fit together as
I move through the various pieces of unittest.

-Frank

quoted

quoted

Yes, overlay_base_base is a terrible name.  Just used to illustrate the point.

I tried this by hand and am failing miserably.  But I am not using the proper
environment (just a quick hack to see if the method might work).  So I would
have to set things up properly to really test this.

If this does work, it would remove my objections to you trying to transform
the existing unittest .dts test data files (because you would not have to
actually modify the existing .dts files).

-- 
David Gibson			| I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au	| minimalist, thank you.  NOT _the_ _other_
				| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson